mg34 need Rate of fire bulltine

It's likely this way to avoid the opressive rushes OKW could do back in the day when they had Kubel Surpression and starting Sturmies.

Because OKW isn't supposed to have literally everything.

Ost has to have some kind of advantage people. I know you love playing your faux SS division, but try to think of the bigger picture here.

An astute analysis Arclyte, really.

I thought the MG34 and MG42 were essentially the same gun, but the MG42 was a rougher design intended to be manufactured quicker.

Edit: ah nevermind. It seams the 42 did have a higher rate of fire.

The 42 had higher RoF as a result of simplification of the gun, in fact in case of smgs and most hmgs too, high RoF is an disadvantage. Germans had many other mgs that had even higher RoF but these were nearly impossible to effectively use on tripod and used way too much ammo. Mg-34 was considered better in every way by german soldiers, with the lower RoF (and thus also better accurancy and effective range) being one of most important reasons. It was also impossible to mount mg-42 as tank mg.

Another example is M3 smg vs the thompson, the first one has cheap and simple construction with cheap light bolt, cousing the gun to shoot very rapidly. The thompson had heavy bolt, especially designed to maximally lower the RoF, so that soldier could shoot longer without changing the magazine and also much more accurate. It was easier to shoot with short series, too. That's why all well trained soldiers got the tompson, while the m3 was a cheap smg for tank crews and engineers ment only for self defence. The fun fact is that soviets had no idea how to build a slow-shooting smg, so they just gave PPSh larger magazine, still the gun needed a lot of training from the soldier to be able to hit target reliably, much more than any other smg.

So yeah, the only advantage of the mg-42 was that it could be produced much cheaper, without it germans wouldn't be able to fulfill their machinegun production plans. Also, it is not shown in game and probably is never going to be.

It's the M42 AT gun of OKW, I guess.

Yeah or the 250 Half-track of the Wehrmacht but still, the Wehr have default access to the 251 HF while the Soviets have the better ZiS 3, the M42 should have the abilities of the raketen to retreat and garrison buildings to make it gameplay practical for it's size if you ask me, Relic should have added the ZiS 2 57mm AT gun instead of it if not then. But the MG34 being a default unit (that's lacking) now doesn't make sense and has no alternatives, even as a doctrine unit it was the cheapest of them all the underperforming and you needed at least 2 or 3 in order for them to be effective while now... It's still underperforming compared to the other MGs (Well, except for the Maxim, when not garrisoned) and coming too late compared to the best 2 MGs in the game, those being the MG42 and Vickers, well, the Vickers being arguably the second best here because of it's price and lack of the MG42 and MG34's vet 1 penetration abilities, plus it's range doesn't really help it that much on urban maps with lots of houses.

P.S.

No, the Flak Half-track is bugged and costs fuel so does not count as an alternative, even my grandmother with an AT rifle could do better.

Edit:

The 42 had higher RoF as a result of simplification of the gun, in fact in case of smgs and most hmgs too, high RoF is an disadvantage. Germans had many other mgs that had even higher RoF but these were nearly impossible to effectively use on tripod and used way too much ammo. Mg-34 was considered better in every way by german soldiers, with the lower RoF (and thus also better accurancy and effective range) being one of most important reasons. It was also impossible to mount mg-42 as tank mg.

Another example is M3 smg vs the thompson, the first one has cheap and simple construction with cheap light bolt, cousing the gun to shoot very rapidly. The thompson had heavy bolt, especially designed to maximally lower the RoF, so that soldier could shoot longer without changing the magazine and also much more accurate. It was easier to shoot with short series, too. That's why all well trained soldiers got the tompson, while the m3 was a cheap smg for tank crews and engineers ment only for self defence. The fun fact is that soviets had no idea how to build a slow-shooting smg, so they just gave PPSh larger magazine, still the gun needed a lot of training from the soldier to be able to hit target reliably, much more than any other smg.

So yeah, the only advantage of the mg-42 was that it could be produced much cheaper, without it germans wouldn't be able to fulfill their machinegun production plans. Also, it is not shown in game and probably is never going to be.

Slight correction, the soviets COPIED it from a finish weapon, which's name I forgot, and even copied their own hand-held weapon from you guys, that being the PTRS and PDRS, hell they didn't even have any kind of rocket propelled AT weapon besides the few lend-lease bazookas they got, could have copied that as well and called it something else, might have saved a great deal of Soviet lives but no, we no copy Amerikanski technology tovarish, we strong independent and proud Soviet people that don't need no imperialist and capitalist technology to help us in our glorious struggle in the great patriotic war!

Absolute, pure, fucking, bullshit.

Edit 2:

I just wanted to add to your production notes of the MG42, so yeah that's why the MG34 was kept in production and service until the end of the war along with the 42 even when it was more complex and more expensive to manufacture, plus Germany being on the defensive mostly after 43' the MG42 felt right at home in the hands of defending German soldiers suppressing Soviets and Allied infantry units, the fear factor was so great that Allied troops called it "Hitler's buzzsaw" even, not kidding.

There are probably a plenty more documentaries that can add to all we've said here that's probably not even half of both MG's stories.

IIRC accuracy doesn't increase suppression, but rate of fire does.

It increases AoE suppression.

It was a Doctrine unit with suppression and a ability deal with vehicles this synergized with Ober as a specialised unit, now its been moved as a stock unit it needs a rework, AP should be removed to compensate for any buffing that follows. I liked the original idea of the MG42 in replace of it in the doctrine that could of had the AP rounds and still kept some kind of creativity with Ober missed opportunity but I'am not taking into account balance here. But for sure the mg34 needs something done.

It was a Doctrine unit with suppression and a ability deal with vehicles this synergized with Ober as a specialised unit, now its been moved as a stock unit it needs a rework, AP should be removed to compensate for any buffing that follows. I liked the original idea of the MG42 in replace of it in the doctrine that could of had the AP rounds and still kept some kind of creativity with Ober missed opportunity but I'am not taking into account balance here. But for sure the mg34 needs something done.

The MG34, suppression? HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA, where? And more importantly, when? The MG34, synergizing with the obers, wut?

If you removed the AP rounds that'd be the death of it really.

And yeah the MG42 in both Luftwaffe and Fortifications was nice but it was overlapping with it too much, the better idea was to replace the Wehr's 42 with the 34 and OKW's 34 with the 42.

If you want to balance it properly buff it a bit more and increase it's price and remove the requirement on it, that's it.

If you don't believe me try modding it and see what I mean, since I've done it.

The MG34, suppression? HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA, where? And more importantly, when? The MG34, synergizing with the obers, wut?

If you removed the AP rounds that'd be the death of it really.

And yeah the MG42 in both Luftwaffe and Fortifications was nice but it was overlapping with it too much, the better idea was to replace the Wehr's 42 with the 34 and OKW's 34 with the 42.

If you want to balance it properly buff it a bit more and increase it's price and remove the requirement on it, that's it.

If you don't believe me try modding it and see what I mean, since I've done it.

Not obers but Oberkommando its identity as faction is specialised units from doctrines and the bygone resource system, the suppression can be laughed at but it but at the end of the day that was what the fortifications doctrine was offering a mg and AP rounds of course the doctrine offered more you get the point, now its a stock unit Oberkommando is not entitled to this is not about balance more so creativity the unit must be reworked, Oberkommado have alot of ways to deal with vehicles/armor now I'm sure there is some room for experimenting. Really the mg34 shouldn't even be in the roster if we are trying to keep Oberkommando different its becoming more like OST. I'am in favour of a buff but giving it less utility so it can't be spammed.

MG34 comes too late and sucks. It needs a buff, be moved to t0 and an increase cost to compensate so at least we will see different openings and strats.

MG34 comes too late and sucks. It needs a buff, be moved to t0 and an increase cost to compensate so at least we will see different openings and strats.

This is already possible with Ostheer, Oberkommado are better than that

Not obers but Oberkommando its identity as faction is specialised units from doctrines and the bygone resource system, the suppression can be laughed at but it but at the end of the day that was what the fortifications doctrine was offering a mg and AP rounds of course the doctrine offered more you get the point, now its a stock unit Oberkommando is not entitled to this is not about balance more so creativity the unit must be reworked, Oberkommado have alot of ways to deal with vehicles/armor now I'm sure there is some room for experimenting. Really the mg34 shouldn't even be in the roster if we are trying to keep Oberkommando different its becoming more like OST. I'am in favour of a buff but giving it less utility so it can't be spammed.

Yeah so let's bring back the Brits' MG emplacement and remove the vickers since they have an alternative in the upgraded UC with the Vickers K upgrade that can also suppress.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Assymetrical balance DOES NOT fucking work, end of story, if it did, OKW wouldn't have gotten the MG34 by default (which was in both the Luftwaffe and Fortifications doctrine, not just Fortifications) and the Brits again would have gotten an MG emplacement instead of a normal mobile MG crew, why do you think everybody is pushing for them to also get the Mortar pit replaced with a normal mortar instead?

Edit: if you're not getting the hint, I'm using your logic of keeping things "different". If one Army doesn't have the basic tools (that being an Engineer/Builder unit, mainline infantry unit, support weapons in some way and a medium tank, ALL BY DEFAULT) then why should another have them?

Edit: if you're not getting the hint, I'm using your logic of keeping things "different". If one Army doesn't have the basic tools (that being an Engineer/Builder unit, mainline infantry unit, support weapons in some way and a medium tank, ALL BY DEFAULT) then why should another have them?

[quote


This is really about OKW design and conjuction with doctrines. The faction was designed around low tier infantry having access to shrecks and some of the doctrines were made in part to supplement them which is the real problem here. We have moved over to a more combined arms approach but its lost some synergy with doctrines. This is the OKW doesn't need this argument, its more than trying to keep factions different, but as I have seen ATM there is experimental jaegar unit with some interesting changes this is just a example of things going in the right direction and attention is being payed to OKW doctrines which is a good thing.

[quote


This is really about OKW design and conjuction with doctrines. The faction was designed around low tier infantry having access to shrecks and some of the doctrines were made in part to supplement them which is the real problem here. We have moved over to a more combined arms approach but its lost some synergy with doctrines. This is the OKW doesn't need this argument, its more than trying to keep factions different, but as I have seen ATM there is experimental jaegar unit with some interesting changes this is just a example of things going in the right direction and attention is being payed to OKW doctrines which is a good thing.

No, that design was changed and altered more times than what you think, it was about "specialized" unit while having your cheap, durable and expendable mainline infantry also be your Anti-Tank infantry which is pure bullshit. Plus the Sturm originally had the shrecks, that's why they also have voice lines for it, ask anybody that's been in the WFA Alpha and they'll tell you, or better yet, there is a voice line video for the Sturms on YouTube, check that.

What should have been done was to implement a dedicated Anti-Tank infantry squad in the form of Panzerjaegers for example, the Obers being a representative Elite Waffen SS Anti-Infantry unit is redundant with the Sturms and Volks since both are semi-proficient at that job, the Volks should have been what the Riflemen are low numbers, shitty training and access to a combat package that contains either StGs, MP40s like in CoH or an MG34/42 since this is what the real Volksgrenadiers were equipped with to augment their firepower and compensate for the lack of numbers since by 44' (when Volksgrenadier divisions were assembled) they were dwindling in man power.

Only 2 doctrines "supplement" Volksgrenadiers and those are the Luftwaffe and Fortifications doctrines.

Combined Arms has been a thing since CoH, it's nothing new in CoH 2, and it also hasn't lost anything, having the MG34 actually even helps OKW choose something else other than the 2 doctrines I already mentioned and Breakthrough has a nice synergy with the MG34 once it's unlocked (which is total bullshit locking it behind tech in the first place) as Volks can be partially ignored as PFs have almost all of the same abilities as them and then some, plus the support of Sturmpioneers and the MG34, again, once unlocked.

No idea what you're trying to say after the "This is the OKW doesn't need this argument" part, all I see is somebody ill experienced telling me that an Army lacking a core Army feature (that being the MG here) is a well thought out Army, which it's not. All good OKW players that didn't want to get overrun by Allied blobs went for either Luftwaffe or Fortifications for the MG34 and used it, everybody else was either ill-experienced or just feeling cheeky for the moment.

MG42 performance and coming at the same time as well.

so we can experience even more MG spam in bigger game modes?

so we can experience even more MG spam in bigger game modes?

Some people simply cannot compete without mgs. Some people think the game would be better if every faction had mg in t0.

so we can experience even more MG spam in bigger game modes?

I thought the game was balanced around 1v1 and 2v2, my bad.

-.-

Some people simply cannot compete without mgs. Some people think the game would be better if every faction had mg in t0.

Some Armies are reliant on their T0 MGs such as the Axis in this game and the British, if it wasn't so WHY in Hell's name was the MG42 and Vickers made T0? The MG42 should have been kept in T1 then and Relic should have moved the Grenadiers in T0.

The Sappers could have been made T0 while the Vickers T1 same goes for the Brits, why not? Well hell I don't know, I'm not balancing this game, if I was, there would be a hell of a lot less stupid senseless bullshit for sure and yes I can support that and have proof in the form of my unreleased and unfinished mods.

*double post

Brits need sections and mgs in the T0 because they can choose to be aggressive(sections) or defensive(mgs) or a mix this is the one current litle argument for a more mobile mortar which I agree with as it could bring about a more mobile play style, though I don't think the emplacement should completely go if there's a way to keep it keep it, if the player chooses he can use mgs/sections building up this defensive's and banking mp for those costly emplacements with minimal model losses or he could opt for a more mobile section with support weapons maybe with some specialised infantry like AT rifles. In short and very basically those two staring units dictate only play styles present within the brits faction, so its really complex question that your asking.

Ost are similiar in nature though they can transition very fast from defensive/aggressive play and are the best at it. They need mgs to allow themselves to do this, open up on the map and from there transition to how ever they like, mgs are not just about area denial they give you time to bank and augment your build its quite complex once again. It is unclear how these kind of things would effect OKW if the mg was competent because now its a stock mg(my view has changed I think the OKW mg needs to be left the hell alone)

The pj could not be implemented and can never be implemented because the faction was design around t0 always having access to shreck doesn't matter how many tweaks were made. Even now the combat package for mp40's is the best solution to not over lap on doctrines as there would be some short/long range synergy between volks with mp40 and specialised infantry don't think its going to happen, though would like to see a experimental unit, I was very much in favour of sturms getting shreck as it looked like it was going to be completely removed and expressed this since OKW can't be without it. This is how relic made the factions not much we can do about it.

Some people simply cannot compete without mgs. Some people think the game would be better if every faction had mg in t0.

mehdi kojayi dash kojayiii
as friends said 34 comes when we dont need it.....and when it comes not a specific unit that wait for it,all i want to say not to buff it itself,only give rate of fire bulttine
Show Spoiler